portsnap mirror servers

[Simon L. Nielsen]

On 2006.04.19 09:50:31 +0200, Oliver Brandmueller wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 19, 2006 at 01:28:56AM +0100, Chris wrote:
> > On 18/04/06, Colin Percival <cperciva at freebsd.org> wrote:
> > > Why do you think there should be an .eu mirror?
> > 
> > Whilst portsnap is fast, it is a noticeable speed difference when
> > using from eu servers, I also think its a good idea for redundancy.
> 
> I did not yet check in the sources or with tcpdump, but from the 
> htrougput I see, I'd guess, there's a lot of sequential two-way 
> communication involved. That kind of traffic is massively influenced by 

Hey,

Recent portsnap versions (since the ones shipped in 6.0 AFAIR) uses
HTTP pipelining (when possible) which means that the latency really
doesn't matter since many requests are sent at once without waiting
for the reply.

I should mention that when pipelining is enabled I don't really see a
big difference when using portsnap from Europe compared to systems in
the US.  More often the local disk limits the speed of portsnap
updates for me rather than bandwith/latency.

As Colin has said before, there will be more mirrors later, but there
really just isn't a need for more right now.

-- 
Simon L. Nielsen
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/attachments/20060419/b00b17d6/attachment.pgp